154:--Great idea, but as above, I'm not convinced that print quality is the problem here. The waviness of the horizontal lines suggests that the paper is not flat against the glass--I've never seen that on historical newsprint; I've certainly seen it on not-so-great scans. Given that over 100,000 copies of this page were printed, there have to be some that are better preserved.
34:
47:
not the best techincal quality however, the writing is readable just about; and given that the subject is 95 years old, a better print may be harder to find. The image also has huge historical value
101:
from less than 100 years ago. I imagine one could go down to their local library and request a high resolution scan of this page from microfilm if one isn't available on the internet. Thoughts?
181:
89:
163:
By the way, please add a source to the image description page; the image is clearly public domain in the US, but it would be useful to know where the scan originates from.
205:
128:. I considered nomming a version of this, but beyond being blurry, the horizontal lines are just too wavy and bent. There's got to be a better version out there.
195:
17:
200:
167:
158:
144:
132:
118:
105:
97:- I'm sure a higher resolution version of this page must be available somewhere. We're talking about a famous front page of
98:
129:
164:
155:
54:
61:
189:
111:
141:
115:
102:
86:
70:
57:
114:
from The New York Times for $ 19. Anyone want to buy it and scan it at 300dpi?
178:
33:
140:
bear in mind that newspaper printing in 1912 was a bit crappy --
78:
New York Times presumable. In the united states public domain
26:
28:Titanic's sinking featured in the New York Times
8:
18:Knowledge (XXG):Featured picture candidates
206:Featured picture nominations/October 2007
32:
7:
196:Ended featured picture nominations
24:
110:BTW, it looks like you can buy
67:Articles this image appears in
1:
201:Featured picture nominations
182:08:47, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
168:21:01, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
159:20:59, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
145:19:07, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
133:18:42, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
119:18:01, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
106:17:56, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
90:16:04, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
112:a reproduction of this page
222:
40:
36:
84:Support as nominator
53:The sinking of the
99:The New York Times
60:documented in the
41:
213:
55:White Star Lines
50:Proposed caption
221:
220:
216:
215:
214:
212:
211:
210:
186:
185:
31:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
219:
217:
209:
208:
203:
198:
188:
187:
173:
172:
171:
170:
149:
148:
147:
123:
122:
121:
92:
80:
79:
76:
73:
68:
65:
62:New York Times
51:
48:
45:
30:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
218:
207:
204:
202:
199:
197:
194:
193:
191:
184:
183:
180:
177:
176:Not promoted
169:
166:
162:
161:
160:
157:
153:
150:
146:
143:
139:
136:
135:
134:
131:
127:
124:
120:
117:
113:
109:
108:
107:
104:
100:
96:
93:
91:
88:
85:
82:
81:
77:
74:
72:
69:
66:
63:
59:
56:
52:
49:
46:
43:
42:
39:
35:
29:
19:
175:
174:
151:
137:
130:Spikebrennan
125:
94:
83:
37:
27:
165:Chick Bowen
156:Chick Bowen
71:RMS Titanic
58:RMS Titanic
190:Categories
38:Original
142:Hadseys
138:Comment
116:Kaldari
103:Kaldari
95:Comment
87:Hadseys
75:Creator
152:Oppose
126:Oppose
44:Reason
179:MER-C
16:<
192::
64:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
